It keeps them alert and active, instead of passive and receptive; it makes them more useful, more capable

Entirely because they are able to make neural connections which solidify and anchor learning in long-term memory. Student attention spans and interest have skyrocketed in classrooms with coding, robotics, music production, invention and innovation to solve a genuine problem in our society or world. I remember not wanting to teach my students without providing these opportunities because I felt I was doing such a disservice to their futures. Why do we allow non-relevant learning to continue? When will students need derivatives in their lives? When will they need factoring on a daily basis? They shouldn't be forced to learn them unless they are part of the solution to the problems they are faced or challenged with.

Consciousness of its real import is still so weak that the work is often done in a half-hearted, confused, and unrelated way

This is what happens when we treat students and teachers as statistical data and numbers. If they aren't allowed to think for themselves and create relevant learning which addresses real-world problems, there isn't genuine challenge and application. I see many classrooms where content is 5-10 years old and is instantly disengaging because it's out of date. Why aren't more classrooms talking about and exploring our current political situation, possible trips to mars, renewable energy, how technology advances impact our society? I'm sure consciousness would be much stronger in these environments and half-heartedness would nearly disappear.

with real things and materials, with the actual processes of their manipulation, and the knowledge of their social necessities and uses

Learning with purpose! Where has this gone? Why is there no longer a greater purpose in most K-12 classrooms? It may have never been there to begin with but I believe if there is a purpose tied to social necessities, greater world good, solving cultural/global problems, many students would be more engaged and motivated to learn as well as rising stars.

Dewey spoke about this long before now and we still adhere to it, why is this? True innovations doesn't come from manuals nor does critical thinking and great problem solvers. Do we really still need manuals with the web and open source?

people will be trained to engage more rigorously and respectfully with each other.

YES!!! This should be the goal in its entirety. I'm so glad to hear you say "promote a more civil discussion". Too often civil discussions are avoided and, many times in education, not even offered. How are we to sustain a successful democracy without civil discussions being present and offered regularly? How are we to train up successful, contributing citizens without offering civil discussion opportunities with regularity? It can't happen and won't happen, my hope is Hypothes.is can help achieve this!

a culture of civility and inquiry, but of course that’s no bulwark against trolls.

You're right, however, a culture of civility and inquiry can very easily overpower trolls if it's built correctly. A strong community can withstand many attacks if it's genuineness and civility remain strong!

Perhaps a way for a site owner to opt out of web annotation, though I worry such a feature would undo the ability to speak truth to power.

I share this worry with you! I believe this infringes on the realm of censorship. How can one post something on the web and opt out of web annotation? Seems to be a double standard...I want the public to hear this but I don't want to hear their thoughts. Certainly limits the ability to speak truth to power.

listening to authors, first of all, but also to other readers, and then sharing where we stand? I certainly like to think so.

Completely agree here! It is in listening to each other that we progress. Without listening to their readers, authors are simply writing what it is they want, think, need, and feel. Without listening to authors, the readers are necessarily even reading for understanding. It seems cyclical but important to note, I wonder what would happen if we listened to each other more often, especially in the case of web text truly bringing about the "net-working" RK described.

Web annotation clearly decenters authority or expertise in several ways

An important establishment in learning from text. How often we presume the author to be the authority. It's important to be open and willing to listen to the ideas of others if we are really seeking expertise. Growing from feedback and criticism is one of my greatest achievements.

RK is not the only one, I'm still feeling very new as well and learning each time I annotate. The newness is sometimes intimidating but I proceed nonetheless. How might it become more user friendly and inviting to grow the audience and participants?

Spe-cifically, it appears that watching other people’s actionsand inferring their emotions and implicit goals recruitssome of the same neural systems involved in planning andcarrying out those actions in one’s own self.

most of the thought processesthat educators care about, including memory, learning,and creativity among others, critically involve both cog-nitive and emotional aspects

Hence the need to be aware of students' emotions. Providing time and space to work through those emotions will enhance learning while the opposite will most likely block any learning from happening at all.

Now, however, you’ll be able to get a real sense of what the Egyptian priesthood experienced when they walked into the pyramids, or what it felt like to live in an early 19th century tenement in New York City.

A good connection but what if students had to find modern day object that resembled such size and scale? How would this change their approach to learning and depth of knowledge?

71 percent of teachers reported that they would like to see our nation rely more heavily on homogeneous grouping of advanced students, while a resounding 77 percent of teachers said that, when advanced students are paired with lower-achieving students for group assignments, it's the smart kids who do the bulk of the work.

How can we disrupt this bias? Is it possible to have advanced students supporting "lower-achieving" students rather than doing the bulk of the work for them?

Differentiation might have a chance to work if we are willing, as a nation, to return to the days when students of similar abilities were placed in classes with other students whose learning needs paralleled their own.

Is this the only strategy/solution for implementing differentiation with success?

Teachers in Finland teach 600 hours a year, spending the rest of time in professional development, meeting with colleagues, students and families. In the U.S., teachers are in the classroom 1,100 hours a year, with little time for collaboration, feedback or professional development.

A third of the classes that students take in high school are electives, and they can even choose which matriculation exams they are going to take. It’s a low-stress culture, and it values a wide variety of learning experiences.

These schools can face a myriad of challenges. They tend to have more difficulty recruiting and keeping the most skilled teachers, and classes are more likely to be disrupted by violent incidents or the emotional fallout from violence in the neighborhood.

Precisely why the current system is ineffective. Pushing more resources into higher needs schools seems equitable for everyone

race and class are inextricably linked, and how that connection is exacerbated in school settings.

It seems to me this is common sense, however, how can we foster different environments that remove the links between race and class? How can we support students as human beings rather than by race, class, or intelligence levels?

Mr. Reardon said the analysis should not be used to rank districts or schools. Test scores reflect not just the quality of schools or their teachers, but all kinds of other factors in children’s lives, including their home environment; whether they attended a good preschool; traumas they have experienced; and whether their parents read to them at night or hire tutors.

Isn't this what test scores should be used for? Implementation and change within education should come from assessments rather than using them as rankings or evaluations

What message are we sending if we take away their chromebook/ipad/laptop/phone?

You make a great point here and have got me thinking about this in a different light. I think a big part of the message needs to be, "what are you going to learn about and how are you going to change the world?" If students had more freedom and flexibility rather than rote practice, memorization, or a one-size-fits-all approach, I think the issues would decline dramatically.

youtube searching for music videos instead of researching the Civil War is frustrating - and the least scary thing about open access. Cyber-bullying, violent or sexually graphic images and videos, and child predators on internet sites aimed at children are infinitely more concerning.

These are very valid concerns and often times ones that educators don't have time to deal with using holistic approaches. I think there is often a search for filters to avoid having to deal with these issues.

I'm highly intrigued by this label. How might this enable teachers to design disruptive learning experiences in their classrooms? I think many students in our district have very high potential to create disruption if equity design is a focus.

Buying technology resources for everyone and running workshops on how to operate them without investigating how the technologies might be helpful

I'm interested in how our design work is answering this issue. I think many times we seek to offer teachers technology, tools, and more when what they really need are opportunities to be challenged by effective, equitable integration questions that result in data reflection for continued improvement

demonstrates how to build a house in just under 4 and a half minutes. Though he builds his house really quickly, don’t be deceived. The majority of students will need 40-50 minutes to build a house. Explain that his simple house is an appropriate goal for Minecraft novices, and that experienced builders should try to build something more “fancy” inside the time constraints.